Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Elephant in the room: rogue and fighter dailies.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5927606" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>I'm not sure it's grandma-friendly, but I agree with your take on <a href="http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/1545/roleplaying-games/dissociated-mechanics" target="_blank">JA's essay</a> (the stuff about Monty Python and fart jokes I'll leave to one side).</p><p></p><p></p><p>Yep.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Agreed. Here're the passages that most irritate me:</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">You might have a very good improv session that is vaguely based on the dissociated mechanics that you’re using, but there has been a fundamental disconnect between the game and the world — and when that happens, it stop being a roleplaying game. You could just as easily be playing a game of Chess while improvising a vaguely related story about a royal coup starring your character named Rook.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">In short, you can simply accept that 4th Edition is being designed primarily as a tactical miniatures game. And if it happens to still end up looking vaguely like a roleplaying game, that’s entirely accidental. . .</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">The advantage of a mechanic like <em>Wushu</em>‘s is that it gives greater narrative control to the player. This narrative control can then be used in all sorts of advantageous ways. . .</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">In the case of <em>Wushu</em>, fidelity to the game world is being traded off in favor of narrative control. In the case of 4th Edition, fidelity to the game world is being traded off in favor of a tactical miniatures game. . .</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">There is a meaningful difference between an RPG and a wargame. And that meaningful difference doesn’t actually go away just because you happen to give names to the miniatures you’re playing the wargame with and improv dramatically interesting stories that take place between your tactical skirmishes.</p><p></p><p>The actual informational content of this is a biographical fact about Justin Alexander - he like <em>Wushu</em> but not 4e. But the rhetoric is that 4e is not an RPG but a series of tactical skirmishes linked by improv.</p><p></p><p>It doesn't both me that Justin Alexander doesn't enjoy, or can't see how, tactical combat could itself be a site in which narrative control is exercised and drama and theme can be expressed. But that's no grounds for projecting his aesthetic preference (or limitation) onto everyone in general, and in needlessly rude terms at that.</p><p></p><p>We also get to learn a few other biographical facts about Justin Alexander. First, he seesm to think that <em>colour</em> is more important than actual authority over the plot. Because he criticises 4e's rules for granting players control over action resolution in combat, while praising <em>Wushu</em> in these terms:</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px"><em>n the case of Wushu these mechanics were designed to encourage dynamic, over-the-top action sequences: Since it’s just as easy to slide dramatically under a car and emerge on the other side with guns blazing as it is to duck behind cover and lay down suppressing fire, the mechanics make it possible for the players to do whatever the coolest thing they can possibly think of is </em></p><p><em></em></p><p><em></em></p><p><em>Second, he apparently doesn't understand skill challenges as a resolution system (and in particular the role of the GM in adjudicating the introduction of complications in relation to successful or failed checks), and I infer therefore doesn't understand their predecessors and close analogues in other systems (eg HeroWars/Quest, Maelstrom Storytelling) either.</em></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 5927606, member: 42582"] I'm not sure it's grandma-friendly, but I agree with your take on [url=http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/1545/roleplaying-games/dissociated-mechanics]JA's essay[/url] (the stuff about Monty Python and fart jokes I'll leave to one side). Yep. Agreed. Here're the passages that most irritate me: [indent]You might have a very good improv session that is vaguely based on the dissociated mechanics that you’re using, but there has been a fundamental disconnect between the game and the world — and when that happens, it stop being a roleplaying game. You could just as easily be playing a game of Chess while improvising a vaguely related story about a royal coup starring your character named Rook. In short, you can simply accept that 4th Edition is being designed primarily as a tactical miniatures game. And if it happens to still end up looking vaguely like a roleplaying game, that’s entirely accidental. . . The advantage of a mechanic like [i]Wushu[/i]‘s is that it gives greater narrative control to the player. This narrative control can then be used in all sorts of advantageous ways. . . In the case of [i]Wushu[/i], fidelity to the game world is being traded off in favor of narrative control. In the case of 4th Edition, fidelity to the game world is being traded off in favor of a tactical miniatures game. . . There is a meaningful difference between an RPG and a wargame. And that meaningful difference doesn’t actually go away just because you happen to give names to the miniatures you’re playing the wargame with and improv dramatically interesting stories that take place between your tactical skirmishes.[/indent] The actual informational content of this is a biographical fact about Justin Alexander - he like [I]Wushu[/I] but not 4e. But the rhetoric is that 4e is not an RPG but a series of tactical skirmishes linked by improv. It doesn't both me that Justin Alexander doesn't enjoy, or can't see how, tactical combat could itself be a site in which narrative control is exercised and drama and theme can be expressed. But that's no grounds for projecting his aesthetic preference (or limitation) onto everyone in general, and in needlessly rude terms at that. We also get to learn a few other biographical facts about Justin Alexander. First, he seesm to think that [I]colour[/I] is more important than actual authority over the plot. Because he criticises 4e's rules for granting players control over action resolution in combat, while praising [I]Wushu[/I] in these terms: [indent][I]n the case of Wushu these mechanics were designed to encourage dynamic, over-the-top action sequences: Since it’s just as easy to slide dramatically under a car and emerge on the other side with guns blazing as it is to duck behind cover and lay down suppressing fire, the mechanics make it possible for the players to do whatever the coolest thing they can possibly think of is [/I][/indent][I] Second, he apparently doesn't understand skill challenges as a resolution system (and in particular the role of the GM in adjudicating the introduction of complications in relation to successful or failed checks), and I infer therefore doesn't understand their predecessors and close analogues in other systems (eg HeroWars/Quest, Maelstrom Storytelling) either.[/i] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Elephant in the room: rogue and fighter dailies.
Top